Archaeologists do not use the label Bell Beaker unless the bell-shaped pottery is present. But the bell-shaped pottery was not the start of the parent culture. The culture of the people who eventually decided to make the pottery starts where Yamnaya people go their separate ways from the Carpathian Basin. One lot go west into Italy and across to Iberia. Another lot go north to the head of the Danube and then establish power centres north of the Alps. Both lots end up making the bell-shaped pottery.

Meanwhile other Yamnaya people start filtering up the other rivers going north from the steppe and create the Corded Ware Culture, which spreads out very widely, overlapping with BB in places.

Rich - I'm not arguing about the genetic composition of BB. I think you have the right idea about the main R1b subclade involved.

I'm trying to get across that what I call the Stelae People were the same bunch who later made Bell Beaker pots. The idea that "Bell Beaker came from Iberia" only holds up if we consider the pottery alone, not the people and where they came from. The Stelae People carried on into the Bell Beaker people. There are BB motifs on stelae. The Bell Beaker people carried on using Stelae sites and honouring the ancestors buried there. There is evidence from teeth that they were related. The tableware is not the be-all and end-all.

Rich - I'm not arguing about the exact genetic composition of BB. I'm trying to get across that what I call the Stelae People were the same bunch who later made Bell Beaker pots. The idea that "Bell Beaker came from Iberia" only holds up if we consider the pottery alone, not the people and where they came from. The Stelae People carried on into the Bell Beaker people. There are BB motifs on stelae. The Bell Beaker people carried on using Stelae sites and honouring the ancestors buried there. There is evidence from teeth that they were related.

Okay, I gotcha.

I was allowing for the possibility that Beaker may not have originated in Iberia. I think it probably did and that your Stelae People explanation is a good one.

Well the current mainstream theories for beaker and corded ware give them very different origins. .... The only way L11 can be both beaker and corded ware is if we turn the clock back to the Dutch model which actually derived beaker from corded ware/single grave people.

Not so Alan. Your "current mainstream theories" are out of date. Frankly what the majority of archaeologists who are not keeping up with developments think is irrelevant. It is not evidence. Harrison and Heyd established not only the sequence from Yamnaya to Bell Beaker, but the influence of Yamnaya on a whole slew of other cultures including Corded Ware. There were separate routes from Yamnaya to the various daughter cultures.

They just gave one opinion out of many. I want to see the opions of other copper age expert archaeologists on this to test its metal. I know that numbers with an opinion do not make it more right but I want to see if their ideas become widely accepted. The general change of society and behavour in that general direction of the eastern model has been recognised for generations but its rather vague and open to interpretation. I just dont feel happy there is enough info although I wouldnt be surprised if they are right. In fact I hope H&H are right because someone needs to be to ever solve this! I am waiting to see how H&H's ideas hold out as they are relatively new and all that is new is not better as I have experienced many times in the never ending cycle of changes in perspectives in archaeology. Call my cynical but I have been around the block following the beakers story crossing four different decades now and seen archaeology's megastars ideas rise and fall and rise again a few times. So I tend to think a model needs to pass to see otther exoerts take on it and I would like to see more responses and new works on beaker to see if the copper age experts come to a consensus. Until then its just an interesting option and the migratory aspect remains hazy anyway and probaby will for a few more years. I dont see enough to feel anything like 'case closed' on beakers although interesting progress is being made. Basically the way its going only ancient DNA will resolve the beaker issue

The old idea of Corded Ware as a local descendant of previous cultures seemed logical at the time to archaeologists looking at a sequence of pottery shapes in their own back yards from Ertebolle (and related) through TRB to Corded Ware. We now know from ancient DNA that the TRB people were not descended from local hunter-gatherers. From a study of skull shape, they most likely came from the Balkans.

The TRB from hunters idea was overturned anyway in the later 90s without DNA or physica; anthropology evidence. In fact nearly all the hunters taking up farming theories had been dropped by the time of the book 'Europe's First Farmers' in the late 90s.

It follows that the Corded Ware people were not direct descendants of the TRB people either, since they look more like hunter-gatherer types, as would be the case if they had moved north from the steppe. Culturally of course they carried influences from Yamnaya.

I think there has always been a feeling that Corded Ware was TRB plus some other elements anyway. Noone ever denied that behavoural traits an 'influences' came in from the east. The question was just migration.

On the specific problems of dating Corded Ware see Wlodarczak 2009, which I just added to the Mini-library. It is completely impossible for Bell Beaker to be derived from Corded Ware since both are of the same age. In fact Wlodarczak 2009 thinks the odd outliers among the early dates for Corded Ware should be ignored, and dates from dendrochronology in Switzerland are more reliable and precise, which would place the start of Corded Ware later than the start of BB.

I know descent of BB from CW was a favourite idea of yours, but it does not wash and is not about to be resurrected.

No I dont have a strong opinion of beaker origins as I think it has so far defeated a clear solution. I know the dutch model but clearly it has been trumped by chronology for the last decade or so and I dont hold that in any sort of literal way. What I wondered and have always felt is that the extreme east vs extreme west dichotomy just never felt right in terms of corded ware and beaker. They are different and clealry defined but in a very broad way they are also similar in broad behavour. So, I always felt they had common ancestry somewhere sometime. However, its clearly not left the sort of trail with nobs on that archaeologists tended to want pre-DNA. So, in a way, H&H are close to what I thought and I hope they are right. However, a lot of the evidence looks a little vague and I want to see if that troubles copper age experts as much as it makes me a little wary.

No Alan. They provided a mass of evidence for the continuation of Yamnaya into Bell Beaker. There has been remarkably little argument over it from other experts in the period. Instead support has been forthcoming from Lemercier on the Bell Beaker of southern France, and from the study of heritable traits in teeth.

It really doesn't matter what people think if they haven't read the paper. Those are dated views, which do not address the evidence supplied by Harrison and Heyd.

I read the Harrison and Heyd paper on Sion again last night. I get the general idea that cultural changes from an eastern source swept Europe and beaker was part of it. I also understand that there were different beaker groups thought of as more western or southern and more central Eurropean. They have the idea that a partial beaker package evolved in Portugal and then developed into the full package somewhere to the east. However, as far as I can see the Pyrennees is not thought any sort of origin point and it seems to be light on beaker. While an eastern source for R1b (perhaps with L51 SNP happening in the SE France/NW Italy/Alps area does have its merits and ties in with the general direction of the spread of pan-European social change etc. An eastern source for LP too makes sense as the real advantage it brings if for milk drinking. It is not neccessary for milk consumption per se for a settled community as they can and originally must have processed it into cheese etc. The real advantage of unprocessed cattle milk I would feel is for mobile groups and I can understand how selection of LP might have really been selected for among mobile pastoralists. I clearly was not necessary for the first farmers in Europe even though cattle dairying of a non-nomadic type spread thought Europe from Bulgaria to England c. 5000-4000BC including what were the 1st farmers in northern and NW Europe. So, I can see scenarios where the general east to west spread of R1b and LP and the general cultural changes tie together. I cant really see any 'out of the Pyrenees' type model with much logic to it. My gut feeling is that L51 first appeared around the western Alps/SE France in or on the cusp of the beaker period and spread from there. Its dates seem spot on and L51* (even if it is a sister clade rather than an ancestor of L11) has an incredibly beaker-like distribution. I would like to know more about the immediate pre-beaker phase at Sion etc which Jean M has called the stelae people. I just would like to see more fleshing out about their material culture, pottery, techology, burial rights etc and more importantly the distribution and lineage of this. I would be more happy if these aspects of this phase other than the stelae themselves was fleshed out to see if more than just the stelae point to some sort of external origin in this phase.

As a complete aside, I was interested in the Sion use of NE-SW orientation. This is the odd new orientation of irish Wedge Tombs whose dates of building almost perfectly correspond with the beaker phase in Ireland and often contain beakers. The orientation is completely out of step with the megalithic tombs of the early farmers. The only thing is that the Wedge Tombs have the wide area and main opening at the SW end. However, this kind of use of both ends of a sacred access is also seen in Passage tombs where contemporary tombs of similar build like Maes Howe in Orkney aand Newgrange in Ireland had the passages on the same axis but with the passage at oopposite ends of the axis (in that case Midwinter sunset and midwinter sunrise. So, I would not let the use of the opposite end of the SW-NE axis stop me wondering if there is a cultural connection between the use of this axis at Sion and Irish Wedge tombs. The dates are very similar.

As a real slightly left field thought, one thing I noticed is that L51 has a hotspot around Lough Erne which is a little unexpected in the earlier beaker phase which otherwise corresponds very well with L51* distribution. Well....the famous Boa Island statue has been debated many times over and over with Iron Age and Early Christian era being the normal options. Could it be copper age. It looks very like a stelae from that era and is pretty unique. Could it be linked to some early beaker or immediate pre-beaker exploritory phase?

Here (on an admittedly pretty 'cosmic' website is the statue next to admittedly much later Scythian period steppes ones

…However, as far as I can see the Pyrennees is not thought any sort of origin point and it seems to be light on beaker.

The Pyrennees could have been the launchpad for Bell Beakers into Central Europe, however any number of possibilities remain open, the only thing we know thus far is that the pre and post-Beaker populations of Northern Spain were likely the same population based on the study done on dental morphology, on the other hand the is evidence for substantial population replacement in Southern France, essentially the area encompassing the Treilles Burial, as for the Pyrenees being light on Beaker, they had quite a beaker distribution, however they only retained certain aspects of the Bell Beaker society, as far as I know, they did not appear to have experienced a change in funerary practices.

While an eastern source for R1b (perhaps with L51 SNP happening in the SE France/NW Italy/Alps area does have its merits and ties in with the general direction of the spread of pan-European social change etc.

Do you have any evidence that points to an expanding culture from the east that reached Western Europe in the time frame that you are assuming? Right now the evidence points to Northern Spain as the launchpad for Bell Beaker, but if you know something else, please do share!

An eastern source for LP too makes sense as the real advantage it brings if for milk drinking. It is not neccessary for milk consumption per se for a settled community as they can and originally must have processed it into cheese etc. The real advantage of unprocessed cattle milk I would feel is for mobile groups and I can understand how selection of LP might have really been selected for among mobile pastoralists.

Yet Treilles, France circa 3000 BC was 26 for 26 C/C and lactose intolerant, and at the same time SJAPL, Southern Alava, Basque Country had 4/19 T/T individuals, and 2/19 C/T individuals. What is more interesting is that the frequencies point to Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium being violated, it could be due to small sample size, but it could be due to the population consisting of a native population, and a foreign population living together. The question would be, who where the natives and who were the foreigners at the time.

I clearly was not necessary for the first farmers in Europe even though cattle dairying of a non-nomadic type spread thought Europe from Bulgaria to England c. 5000-4000BC including what were the 1st farmers in northern and NW Europe. So, I can see scenarios where the general east to west spread of R1b and LP and the general cultural changes tie together. I cant really see any 'out of the Pyrenees' type model with much logic to it.

Again, hopefully the studies that are undergoing in the Steppes would published soon, and perhaps they find LP in those remains, but the finding of LP in Southern Alava as of 3000 BC, and not anywhere else in Europe thus far analyzed, points to a spread of LP from SW Europe as the most likely scenario. Like I said this is could change, and the aDNA databases are greatly lacking, but it is just a piece of evidence right now contradicting the East-west spread of LP at the onset of the Chalcolithic.

My gut feeling is that L51 first appeared around the western Alps/SE France in or on the cusp of the beaker period and spread from there. Its dates seem spot on and L51* (even if it is a sister clade rather than an ancestor of L11) has an incredibly beaker-like distribution. I would like to know more about the immediate pre-beaker phase at Sion etc which Jean M has called the stelae people. I just would like to see more fleshing out about their material culture, pottery, techology, burial rights etc and more importantly the distribution and lineage of this. I would be more happy if these aspects of this phase other than the stelae themselves was fleshed out to see if more than just the stelae point to some sort of external origin in this phase.

I place the origin of L51* in any of the mountainous areas around Western Europe, but I think it was widespread in the mountainous regions of Western Europe. We have evidence of a great deal of people continuing to use caves in the Western Pyrenean region while societies were developing in the Valleys, to me those folks were the R1b folks.

Do you have any evidence that points to an expanding culture from the east that reached Western Europe in the time frame that you are assuming? Right now the evidence points to Northern Spain as the launchpad for Bell Beaker, but if you know something else, please do share!

Like I said before, it is nothing conclusive, but the hypothesis of a spread of Bell Beakers from Northern Spain is supported by the dental morphology study. I would like to see evidence that points to a spread from other regions then.

…However, as far as I can see the Pyrennees is not thought any sort of origin point and it seems to be light on beaker.

The Pyrennees could have been the launchpad for Bell Beakers into Central Europe, however any number of possibilities remain open, the only thing we know thus far is that the pre and post-Beaker populations of Northern Spain were likely the same population based on the study done on dental morphology, on the other hand the is evidence for substantial population replacement in Southern France, essentially the area encompassing the Treilles Burial, as for the Pyrenees being light on Beaker, they had quite a beaker distribution, however they only retained certain aspects of the Bell Beaker society, as far as I know, they did not appear to have experienced a change in funerary practices.

While an eastern source for R1b (perhaps with L51 SNP happening in the SE France/NW Italy/Alps area does have its merits and ties in with the general direction of the spread of pan-European social change etc.

Do you have any evidence that points to an expanding culture from the east that reached Western Europe in the time frame that you are assuming? Right now the evidence points to Northern Spain as the launchpad for Bell Beaker, but if you know something else, please do share!

An eastern source for LP too makes sense as the real advantage it brings if for milk drinking. It is not neccessary for milk consumption per se for a settled community as they can and originally must have processed it into cheese etc. The real advantage of unprocessed cattle milk I would feel is for mobile groups and I can understand how selection of LP might have really been selected for among mobile pastoralists.

Yet Treilles, France circa 3000 BC was 26 for 26 C/C and lactose intolerant, and at the same time SJAPL, Southern Alava, Basque Country had 4/19 T/T individuals, and 2/19 C/T individuals. What is more interesting is that the frequencies point to Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium being violated, it could be due to small sample size, but it could be due to the population consisting of a native population, and a foreign population living together. The question would be, who where the natives and who were the foreigners at the time.

I clearly was not necessary for the first farmers in Europe even though cattle dairying of a non-nomadic type spread thought Europe from Bulgaria to England c. 5000-4000BC including what were the 1st farmers in northern and NW Europe. So, I can see scenarios where the general east to west spread of R1b and LP and the general cultural changes tie together. I cant really see any 'out of the Pyrenees' type model with much logic to it.

Again, hopefully the studies that are undergoing in the Steppes would published soon, and perhaps they find LP in those remains, but the finding of LP in Southern Alava as of 3000 BC, and not anywhere else in Europe thus far analyzed, points to a spread of LP from SW Europe as the most likely scenario. Like I said this is could change, and the aDNA databases are greatly lacking, but it is just a piece of evidence right now contradicting the East-west spread of LP at the onset of the Chalcolithic.

My gut feeling is that L51 first appeared around the western Alps/SE France in or on the cusp of the beaker period and spread from there. Its dates seem spot on and L51* (even if it is a sister clade rather than an ancestor of L11) has an incredibly beaker-like distribution. I would like to know more about the immediate pre-beaker phase at Sion etc which Jean M has called the stelae people. I just would like to see more fleshing out about their material culture, pottery, techology, burial rights etc and more importantly the distribution and lineage of this. I would be more happy if these aspects of this phase other than the stelae themselves was fleshed out to see if more than just the stelae point to some sort of external origin in this phase.

I place the origin of L51* in any of the mountainous areas around Western Europe, but I think it was widespread in the mountainous regions of Western Europe. We have evidence of a great deal of people continuing to use caves in the Western Pyrenean region while societies were developing in the Valleys, to me those folks were the R1b folks.

Why would LP be selected for in a hold out hunter gather group in the mountains? I can understand it becoming selected for among long distance mobile pastoralists where cheese making is inconvenient but I cant see it taking off among a group who have rejected farming. I believe LP was always present in low numbers and its just a question of selection for it. LP is high in areas associated with a long history of cattle dairying, transhumance etc and in many areas the selection could have been going on until a few generations ago. I dont think frequency today tells us much. I am not sure if diversity has every been measured for LP or even if its possible.

Why would LP be selected for in a hold out hunter gather group in the mountains? I can understand it becoming selected for among long distance mobile pastoralists where cheese making is inconvenient but I cant see it taking off among a group who have rejected farming. I believe LP was always present in low numbers and its just a question of selection for it. LP is high in areas associated with a long history of cattle dairying, transhumance etc and in many areas the selection could have been going on until a few generations ago. I dont think frequency today tells us much. I am not sure if diversity has every been measured for LP or even if its possible.

Uhmm, why not??? Thus far the only place that shows LP is the Neolithic settlement of SJAPL in Southern Alava circa 3000 BC. You do know Basques have amongst the highest levels of LP in all of Europe? It looks to me that the LP gene was likely a neutral gene in these folks, who underwent positive selection in the last 5000 years or so. Also, like I said before, the few studies done out there show continuity in pre- and post-Beaker populations in Northern Spain, so there is a very real expansion that took place during the Bell Beaker, whether that expansion was initiated by farmers from Southern Portugal, or was picked up by Hunter Gatherers in Northern Spain, remains to be decided, but I think it fits the model of an expanding population out of Iberia. Also, you can look at the mt-DNA counterparts, yes mt-DNA H has appeared in Neolithic remains in Central Europe, however its frequency is usually ~20%, and often missing from Megalithic sites. Thus far the Neolithic sites in the Basque Country are very rich in mt-DNA H(i.e. 40-50%). So if an expanding population took off from there, it could explain the increment in the frequency of mt-DNA H observed between populations of Neolithic Central Europe and modern Central Europeans. Of course that is a huge leap of faith, because there are tons of factors that could have driven up the frequency of mt-DNA H in Central Europe.

One thing that is interesting about the LP results from SJAPL is that 4 of the 6 LP results were homozygotic. That is, they had T/T at 13910 rather than the heterozygotic T/C.

According to Razib Khan's commentary here, that is out of Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium, which would predict ~7 heterozygotes, not 2. He goes on to speculate that the LP picture at SJAPL could be the product of the relatively recent admixture of two distinct populations.

Quote from: Razib Khan

HWE [Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium] makes a few assumptions. For example, no selection, migration, mutation, or assortative mating. Deviation from HWE is suggestive of one of these dynamics. The sample size here is small, but the deviation is not to be dismissed. Recall that lactase persistence has dominant inheritance patterns. If the trait was being positively selected for you would only need one copy. The enrichment of homozygotes is unexpected if selection in situ is occurring here. It can not be ruled out that one is observing the admixture of two distinct populations. One generation of random mating would generate HWE, but when populations hybridize in realistic scenarios this is not always a plausible assumption. Rather, assortative mating often persists over the generations, slowing down the diminishing of population substructure.

One thing that is interesting about the LP results from SJAPL is that 4 of the 6 LP results were homozygotic. That is, they had T/T at 13910 rather than the heterozygotic T/C.

According to Razib Khan's commentary here, that is out of Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium, which would predict ~7 heterozygotes, not 2. He goes on to speculate that the LP picture at SJAPL could be the product of the relatively recent admixture of two distinct populations.

Quote from: Razib Khan

HWE [Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium] makes a few assumptions. For example, no selection, migration, mutation, or assortative mating. Deviation from HWE is suggestive of one of these dynamics. The sample size here is small, but the deviation is not to be dismissed. Recall that lactase persistence has dominant inheritance patterns. If the trait was being positively selected for you would only need one copy. The enrichment of homozygotes is unexpected if selection in situ is occurring here. It can not be ruled out that one is observing the admixture of two distinct populations. One generation of random mating would generate HWE, but when populations hybridize in realistic scenarios this is not always a plausible assumption. Rather, assortative mating often persists over the generations, slowing down the diminishing of population substructure.

That is what I said just a few posts above:

Yet Treilles, France circa 3000 BC was 26 for 26 C/C and lactose intolerant, and at the same time SJAPL, Southern Alava, Basque Country had 4/19 T/T individuals, and 2/19 C/T individuals. What is more interesting is that the frequencies point to Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium being violated, it could be due to small sample size, but it could be due to the population consisting of a native population, and a foreign population living together. The question would be, who where the natives and who were the foreigners at the time.

Why would LP be selected for in a hold out hunter gather group in the mountains? I can understand it becoming selected for among long distance mobile pastoralists where cheese making is inconvenient but I cant see it taking off among a group who have rejected farming. I believe LP was always present in low numbers and its just a question of selection for it. LP is high in areas associated with a long history of cattle dairying, transhumance etc and in many areas the selection could have been going on until a few generations ago. I dont think frequency today tells us much. I am not sure if diversity has every been measured for LP or even if its possible.

Uhmm, why not??? Thus far the only place that shows LP is the Neolithic settlement of SJAPL in Southern Alava circa 3000 BC. You do know Basques have amongst the highest levels of LP in all of Europe? It looks to me that the LP gene was likely a neutral gene in these folks, who underwent positive selection in the last 5000 years or so. Also, like I said before, the few studies done out there show continuity in pre- and post-Beaker populations in Northern Spain, so there is a very real expansion that took place during the Bell Beaker, whether that expansion was initiated by farmers from Southern Portugal, or was picked up by Hunter Gatherers in Northern Spain, remains to be decided, but I think it fits the model of an expanding population out of Iberia. Also, you can look at the mt-DNA counterparts, yes mt-DNA H has appeared in Neolithic remains in Central Europe, however its frequency is usually ~20%, and often missing from Megalithic sites. Thus far the Neolithic sites in the Basque Country are very rich in mt-DNA H(i.e. 40-50%). So if an expanding population took off from there, it could explain the increment in the frequency of mt-DNA H observed between populations of Neolithic Central Europe and modern Central Europeans. Of course that is a huge leap of faith, because there are tons of factors that could have driven up the frequency of mt-DNA H in Central Europe.

LP gene maybe was in solution at low levels but not being selected for a long time. If LP had been present in the early farmers in general it would surely have been selected for. Cattle dairing certainly was pre-copper age (in western European terms) and appears to have spread across Europe starting in Bulgaria c. 5000BC or earlier and as far as the Britian and Ireland by 4000BC. If LP existed in those pre-4000BC farmers and if LP was an advantage worth having it would have been selected for in a band leading from Bulgaria through central Europe. It either was not in those populations or it wasnt really an advantage for those cattle dairy farmers maybe because they always processed their milk into cheese etc. That to me suggests that mobile pastoralism where you dont want tied down is where milk drinking comes in, not dairying per se. That is where the eastern spread of LP in the copper age makes more sense to me. There was a sustained phase of mobile pastorlism which would have selected for LP. I just dont see anything similar originating in Iberia.

… That to me suggests that mobile pastoralism where you dont want tied down is where milk drinking comes in, not dairying per se. That is where the eastern spread of LP in the copper age makes more sense to me. There was a sustained phase of mobile pastorlism which would have selected for LP. I just dont see anything similar originating in Iberia.

Perhaps you ought to read this paper(see below) about Bell Beaker presence in the Pyrenees, they talk about how Pyrenean herders infiltrated Southeastern France. Also interesting in that paper is that while Catalonia has Types 1 and II of Bell Beakers, sharing it with Southeastern France and the Southeastern portion of the Pyrenees, the Basque Country only had Type III Bell Beakers, and it was shared with SW France, they only have one type of Beaker. Mind you this was written before any study done on dental morphology or even the aDNA study, they actually propose the migration vector going from the Pyrenees to Southeastern France based on the evolution of the Bell Beaker types. I recommend you read up about pastoralism in the Basque Country, in fact, they had mobile pastoralism, and it is believed to be linked to the arrival Megalithism, although some authors argue for a local origin of Megalithism in the upper Basque Country, and a demic diffusion in the lower Ebro Valley. Anyhow, here is the paper about Bell Beaker Culture in the Pyrenees.

We are not convinced by the argument which attributes an extra peninsular origin to the Bell Beaker culture, and we still continue to believe that this type of ceramics appeared in the evolution of the cave cultures during the eNeolithic and we considering that its apparition must be looked for in the Valley of Guadalquivir from where it likely propagated to other territories and peninsular cultures with the intense relations that developed during the eNeolithic , also that the Pyrenean culture, which extended around the Pyrenees and advanced to Southeastern France until it reached the Alps and Burgundy, was likely one of the amongst the launch pads for the expansion of this culture to other European regions. The Pyrenean herders during the eNeolithic gave rise to the interchange of types and forms of culture, without needing to explain it based on assuming great population movements, after adopting the V-tip arrows from the Almerienses, once the latter came in contact with them after they expanded until the Pyrenees, the Pyrenean herders became traders and up to a point warriors, they infiltrated the people of the Cave cultures in Southeastern France, and propagated there the usage of copper, as well as the Bell Beakers. The Bell Beaker was adopted as a “trend” or a “luxurious” ceramic with the local ceramic type which wasn’t decorated. It was through the Pyrenean territory of Southeastern France that the Bell Beaker influences arrived in Catalonia, this time coming in the opposite way from Northern Italy, there is also a presence of Corded Ware impressions in the Bell Beaker package that arrived in Catalonia, throughout the Atlantic coast of France several things diffused as well, such as the Balenkaleku combat axe.

One thing that is interesting about the LP results from SJAPL is that 4 of the 6 LP results were homozygotic. That is, they had T/T at 13910 rather than the heterozygotic T/C.

According to Razib Khan's commentary here, that is out of Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium, which would predict ~7 heterozygotes, not 2. He goes on to speculate that the LP picture at SJAPL could be the product of the relatively recent admixture of two distinct populations.

Quote from: Razib Khan

HWE [Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium] makes a few assumptions. For example, no selection, migration, mutation, or assortative mating. Deviation from HWE is suggestive of one of these dynamics. The sample size here is small, but the deviation is not to be dismissed. Recall that lactase persistence has dominant inheritance patterns. If the trait was being positively selected for you would only need one copy. The enrichment of homozygotes is unexpected if selection in situ is occurring here. It can not be ruled out that one is observing the admixture of two distinct populations. One generation of random mating would generate HWE, but when populations hybridize in realistic scenarios this is not always a plausible assumption. Rather, assortative mating often persists over the generations, slowing down the diminishing of population substructure.

That is what I said just a few posts above:

Yet Treilles, France circa 3000 BC was 26 for 26 C/C and lactose intolerant, and at the same time SJAPL, Southern Alava, Basque Country had 4/19 T/T individuals, and 2/19 C/T individuals. What is more interesting is that the frequencies point to Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium being violated, it could be due to small sample size, but it could be due to the population consisting of a native population, and a foreign population living together. The question would be, who where the natives and who were the foreigners at the time.

I dont know much about the Neolithic and early Copper Age of the Baque country. Do you have any papers on the subject?

… That to me suggests that mobile pastoralism where you dont want tied down is where milk drinking comes in, not dairying per se. That is where the eastern spread of LP in the copper age makes more sense to me. There was a sustained phase of mobile pastorlism which would have selected for LP. I just dont see anything similar originating in Iberia.

Perhaps you ought to read this paper(see below) about Bell Beaker presence in the Pyrenees, they talk about how Pyrenean herders infiltrated Southeastern France. Also interesting in that paper is that while Catalonia has Types 1 and II of Bell Beakers, sharing it with Southeastern France and the Southeastern portion of the Pyrenees, the Basque Country only had Type III Bell Beakers, and it was shared with SW France, they only have one type of Beaker. Mind you this was written before any study done on dental morphology or even the aDNA study, they actually propose the migration vector going from the Pyrenees to Southeastern France based on the evolution of the Bell Beaker types. I recommend you read up about pastoralism in the Basque Country, in fact, they had mobile pastoralism, and it is believed to be linked to the arrival Megalithism, although some authors argue for a local origin of Megalithism in the upper Basque Country, and a demic diffusion in the lower Ebro Valley. Anyhow, here is the paper about Bell Beaker Culture in the Pyrenees.

We are not convinced by the argument which attributes an extra peninsular origin to the Bell Beaker culture, and we still continue to believe that this type of ceramics appeared in the evolution of the cave cultures during the eNeolithic and we considering that its apparition must be looked for in the Valley of Guadalquivir from where it likely propagated to other territories and peninsular cultures with the intense relations that developed during the eNeolithic , also that the Pyrenean culture, which extended around the Pyrenees and advanced to Southeastern France until it reached the Alps and Burgundy, was likely one of the amongst the launch pads for the expansion of this culture to other European regions. The Pyrenean herders during the eNeolithic gave rise to the interchange of types and forms of culture, without needing to explain it based on assuming great population movements, after adopting the V-tip arrows from the Almerienses, once the latter came in contact with them after they expanded until the Pyrenees, the Pyrenean herders became traders and up to a point warriors, they infiltrated the people of the Cave cultures in Southeastern France, and propagated there the usage of copper, as well as the Bell Beakers. The Bell Beaker was adopted as a “trend” or a “luxurious” ceramic with the local ceramic type which wasn’t decorated. It was through the Pyrenean territory of Southeastern France that the Bell Beaker influences arrived in Catalonia, this time coming in the opposite way from Northern Italy, there is also a presence of Corded Ware impressions in the Bell Beaker package that arrived in Catalonia, throughout the Atlantic coast of France several things diffused as well, such as the Balenkaleku combat axe.

Thanks. I haven't been able to download that paper yet but I wonder if that migration is somehow related to the unusual French plot in figure 10 from Desideri's 2008 paper. One of the French plots sits between the Czechs!

Anyways, would you mind looking over a post (actually 3) I made at polako's site, arguing the route of r1b in Western Europe? I'd like to have your take on the points I made : )

Is Argiedude still on this forum? Are there any problems with his findings? I just found it interesting that he wrote "In the case of Mongolia, Iran, and Yemen, L51* were the only type of L51 found."

I wonder where L51*'s L11 friends were and why they didn't go east with him? Maybe L51 was out there before L11 came about.

We do have U152 with Bashkir's though.

Quote from: Argiedude

There's no intermediate branch between L51 and L11 in R1b. Richard Rocca apparently found 2 Italian L51* samples. I was able to locate 4 probable L51* samples, including the 2 Italians. The 4 are derived for 18096360 and 19425608 (base position, not rs), and are negative for L11. L51 wasn't in the range of the tested section of the y-chromosome, that's why I say apparently, but I doubt I made a mistake. The 4 samples are HG01066, NA19720, NA20537, NA20785 (Puerto Rico, Mexico, Italy, Italy).

Now the interesting thing is that there is one more SNP, base position 19418178, which is ancestral in L23*, but derived in L11. This SNP had a good call in 3 of the presumed L51* samples, and it turns out 2 were ancestral and 1 derived (Puerto Rico, Italy ancestral; Mexico derived). So we might be looking at a new step in the R1b branch, located between L51 and L11.

And by the way, here's a nice map of L51* that I made just the other day.

Is Argiedude still on this forum? Are there any problems with his findings? I just found it interesting that he wrote "In the case of Mongolia, Iran, and Yemen, L51* were the only type of L51 found."

I wonder where L51*'s L11 friends were and why they didn't go east with him? Maybe L51 was out there before L11 came about.

We do have U152 with Bashkir's though.

Quote from: Argiedude

There's no intermediate branch between L51 and L11 in R1b. Richard Rocca apparently found 2 Italian L51* samples. I was able to locate 4 probable L51* samples, including the 2 Italians. The 4 are derived for 18096360 and 19425608 (base position, not rs), and are negative for L11. L51 wasn't in the range of the tested section of the y-chromosome, that's why I say apparently, but I doubt I made a mistake. The 4 samples are HG01066, NA19720, NA20537, NA20785 (Puerto Rico, Mexico, Italy, Italy).

Now the interesting thing is that there is one more SNP, base position 19418178, which is ancestral in L23*, but derived in L11. This SNP had a good call in 3 of the presumed L51* samples, and it turns out 2 were ancestral and 1 derived (Puerto Rico, Italy ancestral; Mexico derived). So we might be looking at a new step in the R1b branch, located between L51 and L11.

And by the way, here's a nice map of L51* that I made just the other day.

The Bashkiri result has little meaning since all the U152+ men had the same exact halpotype. They could have moved out there 100 years ago or 500 years ago. As for the Mongolian result, it may or may not be L51+ as Argiedude has only predicted it based on DYS426=13. While not very common, there are L51- kits with DYS426=13.

Is Argiedude still on this forum? Are there any problems with his findings? I just found it interesting that he wrote "In the case of Mongolia, Iran, and Yemen, L51* were the only type of L51 found."

I wonder where L51*'s L11 friends were and why they didn't go east with him? Maybe L51 was out there before L11 came about.

We do have U152 with Bashkir's though.

Quote from: Argiedude

There's no intermediate branch between L51 and L11 in R1b. Richard Rocca apparently found 2 Italian L51* samples. I was able to locate 4 probable L51* samples, including the 2 Italians. The 4 are derived for 18096360 and 19425608 (base position, not rs), and are negative for L11. L51 wasn't in the range of the tested section of the y-chromosome, that's why I say apparently, but I doubt I made a mistake. The 4 samples are HG01066, NA19720, NA20537, NA20785 (Puerto Rico, Mexico, Italy, Italy).

Now the interesting thing is that there is one more SNP, base position 19418178, which is ancestral in L23*, but derived in L11. This SNP had a good call in 3 of the presumed L51* samples, and it turns out 2 were ancestral and 1 derived (Puerto Rico, Italy ancestral; Mexico derived). So we might be looking at a new step in the R1b branch, located between L51 and L11.

And by the way, here's a nice map of L51* that I made just the other day.

That is interesting. RR's L51* distribution map is interesting. Problem is of course it doesnt tell anything about direction of spread and origin point. I tended to think that it spread out from the west-Alpine area but maybe the eastern extremity (which I think was somewhere like SE Germany/Poland was actually nearer the origin and that there was a period when there was only L51* and it lay in the east. I would however have thought that L51*'s ratio to L11 and derived can only have been high either somewhere in the east where L11 is low or in an early period when L11 hadnt come about. I can only think that the steppe Iranians were in some way the link between Iran and Mongolia.

That is interesting. RR's L51* distribution map is interesting. Problem is of course it doesnt tell anything about direction of spread and origin point. I tended to think that it spread out from the west-Alpine area but maybe the eastern extremity (which I think was somewhere like SE Germany/Poland was actually nearer the origin and that there was a period when there was only L51* and it lay in the east. I would however have thought that L51*'s ratio to L11 and derived can only have been high either somewhere in the east where L11 is low or in an early period when L11 hadnt come about. I can only think that the steppe Iranians were in some way the link between Iran and Mongolia.

I had created a new map based on the recent Niederstätter, et al. (2012) study:

We have to keep in mind that L51(xP312,U106) may hold a hidden mutation and be a little brother to P312 and U106. Either way, I don't think there is any doubt that the distribution is primarily Franco-Italian.